A new study finds that the most socially disconnected city in the country is in St. Louis, Missouri, a place where the number of people living alone jumped from 6.5 percent to 11.9 percent in the last decade.The number of residents living in their own homes also went up.The study is part of the St. Charles-based Urban Sociology Center's Social Distancing Index.Researchers found that the metro area...
The American Psychological Association has officially classified sexual assault as a mental health issue, which means it’s now officially a crime and a criminal offense.
This is the latest step in the DSM-5, the bible of the mental health field.
Its purpose is to define mental disorders, and this includes sexual assault, which is one of the main categories of mental health.
The definition of sexual assault is that it’s when someone makes unwanted sexual advances, usually with a person’s consent, without their consent.
Sexual assault can occur when someone is unable to consent to sex because they’re intoxicated, or has a history of trauma, and because of a lack of consent.
The APA classifies it as a “physical threat,” meaning that it “threatens to physically harm a person,” or when it “could reasonably be expected to cause serious physical harm.”
It’s the same category of mental disorder that includes a history or a history that’s “a significant factor in the offender’s decision to engage in conduct,” or a “significant factor in aggravating the offender.”
This means that even if you’re just thinking about having sex with a friend, and the guy says no, you have a mental illness, according to the APA.
The Associated Press obtained a draft of the APAs new definition, and its language on sexual assault was heavily redacted, so we have to take their word for it.
The new DSM-V will be released next month.
The American Psychological Society says the new definition is based on the DSM’s original definition, which was released in 1987.
The original definition was called the National Institute of Mental Health’s Violence Against Women Survey.
The APA defines sexual assault in the same way.
The word “sexual” is a common part of the DSM, so it’s a bit of a stretch to think this new definition will just make sense.
We’re not talking about a simple, two-word change here.
The DSM-IV added a new term, “nonconsensual sexual behavior,” in 1988, and it defines it this way: “Nonconsensual physical contact may include any touching, kissing, fondling, fondle, and/or touching of the genital area of a person who is unconscious or unable to give consent, or sexual touching of a sexual partner or of a nonconsensual romantic partner, by a person whose body is covered with a condom.”
But the new DSM definition of “nonsexual” doesn’t necessarily make sense to me.
It’s a more expansive definition, meaning that if you do it, it’s still sexual assault.
What’s more, this definition is not binding.
It doesn’t say what you can and can’t do to someone who’s not consenting to sex.
The definition of nonconsent is a much more complex issue, and APA’s guidance on this is quite clear.
The idea behind the new APA definition of assault is to make sure that the people who commit sexual assault are considered to be criminals, rather than victims, and that it gives people a sense of control.
This means you can’t just say, “Hey, you know what, I didn’t do anything to you,” because that’s not the definition.
There needs to be some kind of consequence, and we can only be safe with that.
What this means is that we can’t blame the person who was raped, or the person whose partner was raped for what happened to them.
Rape can never be considered a victimless crime.
We can’t put that blame on the rapist or the victim for being too drunk or too high, or having drugs or alcohol.
That’s the problem.
You’re talking about someone who was really drunk or high.
And that’s why you need a victim.
We don’t want to see them become a criminal, so if you see them in that situation, don’t be afraid to get help.
The New York Times has a good piece on the new language, which makes it clear that there’s no “victimless crime” for rape.
Instead, the new rule says that the person responsible for the crime is “responsible for the harm or damage caused to others.”
That’s why it says “for the harm to others” instead of “for physical injury.”
The New Orleans Advocate has a very good analysis of the new wording, which I highly recommend reading:The APAs decision to classify sexual assault this way was not surprising.
After all, the APAS said previously that it would be possible to revise the DSM to clarify that sexual assault “is not a crime under any circumstances.”
The APAS says that they were not doing this to take away from the victims.
Rather, the rule is to “ensure that the burden of proof is on the accused” to show that someone else was the victim of sexual abuse.
It makes it harder to convict a person of rape, since the accused has to prove that the woman wasn’t raped.
The decision to make sexual assault a crime has nothing to